A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Fine example of Tarver Engineering release for service



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 26th 04, 06:59 PM
Jim Knoyle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"fudog50" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:23:23 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"running with losers" wrote in
message om...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:


"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
. ..
"Jim Knoyle" wrote:

Hang on here a second now Jim, you still need two samples. As Dan
says you need 'static pressure' to read the altitude from and you
need 'pitot pressure' (ram air pressure) as well as the static
pressure to derive the airspeed reading from. Sounds like you're
saying that you can read 'both' from just the 'ram air pressure'
alone. Or did I misunderstand you?

Jim has finally figued out what a pitot tube is, but somehow he still

wants
to be correct in his archive troll. It is a great paradox.


I know...ain't life a bitch John


Ummm,
I performed dozens of the old FAR 91.171 (pitot/static annual
checks) and 91.172 (mode 'C' checks) in the early 90's on Pipers,
Cessna, Grumman, Lanceair, Beech, you name it. Also performed all the
calibration and repair necessary, (the lines, indicators, ports, pitot
tubes, etc.) I worked a part time job at a GA avionics shop at Palo
Alto.
IIRC, the only indicator that had both pitot and static inputs
was the VSI/Rate of climb indicator and the internal bellows in the
gauge performed the differential action. Airspeed has pitot inputs
only. Baro Alt. has static port input only. Wish I could draw you a
diagram on here, it would explain everything.


Since posting rubbish like he posted below, no amount of diagrams
have helped. It's a case of "That's my story and I'm sticking to it!"

Revealing that in my 37 years up the road at SFO I had done easily
hundreds of low range pitot/static leak tests resulting in the replacement
of dozens of pitot tubes/probes/masts or whatever Tarver wants to
call those pointy things up front, only brought about months of fraud
claims and all of the other bits splaps is well known for.
Requoting Gord's question to me out of context is only his latest.
Pt *still* equals (altitude pressure) + (impact pressure).

JK
http://home.att.net/~j.knoyle/the_ta...hronicles.html

GREAT MOMENTS IN ADA:
"That is the case with all modern transports Gord. Pitot tubes are only
used
for flight test back up instrumentation for modern transports; pitot tubes
have a nasty habbit of atracting mud bees and are therefore not reliable
enough for revenue these past few decades."

-- John Tarver, Skylight Avionics, December 26, 2001



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fine example of Tarver Engineering release for service running with scissors Instrument Flight Rules 64 March 3rd 04 05:01 AM
Fine example of Tarver Engineering release for service running with scissors Instrument Flight Rules 7 February 28th 04 05:07 PM
To Tarver Engineering fudog50 Military Aviation 2 January 9th 04 07:15 PM
About death threats and other Usenet potpourri :-) Dudley Henriques Military Aviation 4 December 23rd 03 07:16 AM
FS: Aviation History Books Neil Cournoyer Military Aviation 0 August 26th 03 08:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.